An Eco-Linguistic Approach
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 19, Issue 11, Ver. II (Nov. 2014), PP 52-58 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org KelambiR’s Eco-lexicals in Serdang Malay: An Eco-linguistic Approach Faridah1, T. Silvana Sinar2, Aron Meko Mbete3, Eddy Setia4 1,2,3,4 Departement of Linguistics, Postgraduate School, University of Sumatra Utara (Indonesia) Abstract: This article studies the KelambiR’s eco-lexicals(KEL) in Serdang Malay (SM). It focuses on the collection of KEL that contains the stocks of local knowledge in SM. The data are obtained by interviewing, observing and documenting. The method used in this study is qualitative. The eco-lexicals in connection to kelambiR‘coconut’ areprimarily examined by using the perspectives of the followings, such as, the inter- relationship, diversity, and environment. To analyze the meanings of those lexicals, the researchers use the external referential, semantics, and the anthropolinguistic concept ofcultural meanings. The findings show that the KEL and expressions are regarded as part of SM’s natural resources, language, and culture. The old generations know, understand and use such lexicon and its life principles. However, the situation in the past is contrary to the fact that young generations, today, rarely use KEL, and even do they not recognize and/or understand such words. Keywords: Eco-linguistics, eco-lexicals, environment, KEL, and Serdang Malay I. Introduction 1.1 Background Serdang Malay(SM) is the mode of Malay culture in one area or the central culture of Malay in Deli Serdang and Serdang Bedagai Districts in North Sumatra(Indonesia),in which the Malay Sultanate (MS)was ever getting a fame in its time. As a mode and tool of socio-cultural life, SM had ever recorded and became the portrait of natural reality and of the sultanate life which was considered as the central of culture, especially as the formal languange in the sultanate. It is generally known that culture and verbal picture of Malay environment is really recorded symbolically in Malay language. Particularly, the cultural environment of MS as the central range, and the orientation of social life was also kept and recorded in Malay language. Therefore, as a language that functioned to record the spiritual and material treasure of its community and as a language that was ever reached its heydey in Sultanate of Deli Serdang Bedagai, Malay language embodies a variety of cultural treasuresin the society, and natural resources where it is used. The fact shows that SM is almost left by its speakers (Sinar, 2010:71). Cultural environment changes rapidly. Consequently, the social civilization of SMmeets its great challenge, aspecially in facing the effect of globalization era and the cross-cultural movement, society and environment, and the norm shift. It affects negatively to SM because the use of this language is rarely found in the society and it will not be recognized by young generation. We need to stress that the parameters in eco-linguistics that are used to and applied in analyzing language phenomena are: environment, diversity, interrelation, interaction, and interdependence. The eco-region, the bio and non-bio diversity, interaction, interrelation, and interdependence among communities from many aspects are recorded in the lexical and grammatical treasure of SM.This study identifies and analyzes the forms of KelambiR lexicon and the individual meanings of the language in the environment observed. The meanings that are analyzed in KelambiR lexicon cover the denotative lexical meanings which refer to external reference (Verhaar, 2006:389) directing to particular plants or animals, and cultural meaning which refers to the contextual usage, including the basic forms and derivative forms. The individuals of the environmental language (Mbete, 2013:5-7) or ecological linguistics, green grammar (Denison, in Fill, 2001:75-76) with their lexical meaning referentially refer to biotic or abiotic, which is semantically are classified into noun or animate and unanimate things, and countables and uncountables. Those are the pictures of knowledge, specification, understanding, and experience representing “the depth, regularity, and continuity”, interaction, interrelation, and interdependence of the speakers of SM towardthe KelambiR lexicon where the speakers live. Lexicon usage referring to KelambiR plants which is contextually regarded as cultural meanings is well discussed. The cultural meanings picture the correlation among the diversity of the lexicon and individual unit in the environmental language (in the form of lexicon) and the diversity of biotic and culture (Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson, 2001:2-3), either material or non-material. This gives important information about the meanings of lexicon and verbal texts. It should be realized that the treasure of knowledge and local wisdom, specifically related to biotic and non-biotic diversity and the concepts of its preservation was ever recorded in local language (see Skutnabb-Kangas & Phillipson, 2001:2-6). www.iosrjournals.org 52 | Page KelambiR’s Eco-lexicals in Serdang Malay: An Eco-linguistic Approach The basic forms of lexicon and generic lexicon and its derivative forms that have special meanings delineate the intimacy of the relationship and the interdependence with particular plants or animals where SM is used. It was found that there are treasures or KelambiR lexicon and its derivatives, either in the form of nominal, verbal or adjective which characterize the SM. However, they are now vanishing because it is seldom used by the young generation. This will erase the local wisdom and the stock of knowledge of KelambiR lexicon itself. II. Literature reviews 2.1 Eco–linguistics The term of ecology was firstly introduced by Ernest Haeckel (1834–1914). Ecology is the study that discusses how living things are able to survive by making relationship among them and with unanimate things in their environment.Eco–linguistics, a science of interdisciplinary, is the umbrella for all research investigating languages which is in the good relationship with ecology as what was ever said by Fiil (2001:126) in Lindo and Bundsgaard (2000), or with an approach that studies language and its relationship with environment.Three parameters of eco-linguistics that can become our guidance in making research on language and environment are (1) interrelationship, interaction, dan interdependence, (2) particular environment, and (3) diversity in the environment either human beings or other creatures.Everything is changing except the change itself. The shift also happens to language, culture, environment, and of course to the social-ecological environment of the sultanate. From the point view of eco-linguistics, the existence of language and its users are regarded as organism that appears, lives, grows, develops and finally disappears. It is clearly stated by Fill and Muhlhauster in Mbete(2010:5). Haugen (1972) in Peter (1996:57) says that eco-linguistics is a language interaction with its environment. Crystal (2008:161-162) says that highlighting the language change, linguistic diversity, behavioral role, and language awareness surely exist.Many experts give definitions on language ecology, eco-linguistics or green linguistics in particular context that are related to the range towards the objective of eco-linguistic study. It is clear that eco-linguistics emphasizes its purpose on awareness towards the problems reflected which is ecologically related to language symptoms and to other perspectives.Haugen (1970 in Mbete 2009:11-12) says that there are ten kinds of study in ecology. They are comparative historical linguistics, demographic linguistics, sociolinguistics, dialinguistics, dialectology, filology, prescriptive linguistics, geopolitics, ethnolinguistics, and typology. Traditional pointsof view are relevant to ecocritical discourse analysis (called asco-crytic text)and linguistics ecology(eco-linguistics) (see Fill, 1996, in Wikipedia). Environmental lexicon described in this study is related to eco-linguistics. Linguistic ecology portrays the knowledge and understanding of natural and social environment in the forms of language codes. The presence of natural and social environments show an interaction and interrelation of the language itself. Sapir states clearly that vocabulary in a language can picture clearly the physical and social environment. A complete vocabulary in certain language is seen as a complex discovery of ideas, interest and position that the community may concern about. It is possible for us to widen them into the characters of physical and cultural environment (Sapir in Fill and Muhlhausler, 2001:14). However, there are dominant languages in the dynamicenvironment, and language changing in its utterance, especially lexicon utterances that bring about the language change (Mbete, 2009). In other words, language change reflects social and cultural change in the environment. This phenomena happens to sultanate lexicon.In the perspective of eco-linguistics, language change reflects the environmental change and vice versa which they finally affect the language use, such as the lines of a poem in Malay (Sinar, 2010:73). 2.2 Anthropological linguistics Franz Boaz is the pioneer of anthropology linguistics with its variants in America. In Europe it is well- known as ethnolinguistics (Duranti, 1997). In Indonesia, it is called cultural-linugistics (Riana, 2003:8). Basically they share similarity in names (Crystall, 1992:20;